Category: Opinion/Editorial

Help desk software is changing – it’s social customer service application built for the cloud. Traditionally, customer support software was designed to focus on resolving issues rather than helping people. Customer cases were generally handled by any available agent on a “first come first serve” basis, and agents typically knew little to nothing about the customer. With no mechanism for storing any context or customer background, agents spent more time re-learning about the issue rather than actually resolving it. And if that wasn’t enough, customer support software had to be maintained and updated, which meant companies wasted considerable time and resources hiring and training agents. There was no system for retaining customers beyond the fleeting one-time interactions, and it encouraged an impersonal approach to handling customer support.

Today’s customer service software bears few similarities to the software of the past. Customers are demanding more and better customer service, delivered through every conceivable channel from apps to mobile devices to the web. That’s why many smart businesses are using software as a service as a solution for help desk management. The key contrast with traditional software is that today’s software requires no software. Software as a service is delivered through the web, which means no installation or updates. So you can lower costs and raise agent productivity. You can spend less time training agents and more time making customers happy. And you can resolve customer issues quickly and easily so no customer ends up in “support purgatory.” The future of software is no software.

Like most technology fans, I am always ready and willing to try any technology that promises to simplify my life. QR codes seemed to present an accessible and uniform way for people with smart devices to interact with advertising, marketing and media. Those little squares of code seemed to open a world of opportunity and potential. But after using them for a length of time, I shifted my perspective.

My initial honeymoon with QR codes was very short-lived. The initial rush that I had received from trying to frame the code on my device had lost its luster. I started to view QR codes as a barrier to additional information. And in many instances, the rewards (whatever I received as a result of scanning the code) did not measure up to the effort of the transaction itself.

Consider a recent study by comScore, which states that only 14 million American mobile device users have have interacted with a QR code. In essence, less than 5% of the American public has scanned a QR code. So where’s the disconnect?

Inadequate technology, lack of education and a perceived dearth of value from QR codes are just three of the reasons mobile barcodes are not clicking with Americans. But it goes deeper than that.

One of the odd questions I keep being asked about the iPad is “Where do you plug in USB stuff?” It’s a sister phrase to the weird criticism oft thrust at Apple’s device, “Ah, it’s too limiting for me: I can’t plug in USB sticks.” This is weird because other makers, notably Apple’s biggest competitor, Samsung, follow the same proprietary connector path and because I’ve never once thought about plugging a stick into the iPad. Maybe, soon, most people won’t think like this either–because the USB memory stick is very swiflty about to be obsolete.

To understand why, you’ve only got to look at how ubiquitous they are now. They’re a handful of dollars at your convenience store, novelty designs compete with austere ones, and they’re thrown around like confetti as promos at tradeshows. Any tech that’s got to this level of commodity is due to be banished to the history books. It’s just the way of things.

I jest, but USB memory stick tech hasn’t really advanced ever, even while it’s flourished like crazy to fill a technological need–moving files swiftly and easily between computers, faster and with more convenience than burnable CDs. That’s partly why it’s got so cheap so fast. But this also means that a bunch of other technologies have been advancing, and are about to make the USB stick obsolete.

It’s all about the mobile computing revolution, which has done two very important things: introduced people to the idea of accessing wireless data on the go or anywhere they could imagine and also changed how people think about computer files.

What’s A USB Stick For, Anyway?

USB sticks are useful for two things: Storing files temporarily, and sharing with another computer user. To drop a file on your USB stick you use your computer’s file manager, then you pop it in the new computer and access it.

Remember SOPA? Remember the urgency with which the bill’s backers were trying to convince us that its intended target, online piracy, was a clear and present danger? Remember how those dastardly BitTorrenters were going to deprive us of a functioning, creative movie industry?

Well, an academic study now doing the rounds suggests that’s nonsense. According to researchers at the University of Minnesota and Wellesley College who examined box office history, piracy has never affected Hollywood’s U.S. revenues. After BitTorrent file-sharing software started appearing online in the early 2000s, it had no effect — none whatsoever — on domestic receipts.

Sunday’s New York Times was a Luddite’s dream. Tthe paper’s Sunday Review section had three lengthy opinion pieces dedicated to “Life Under Digital Dominance” (their words, not mine), including Evgeny Morozov’s lengthy treatise that social media will kill originality because we’re all too afraid to publicly “like” something on Facebook that our friends don’t like, a plea to adopt European-style rules to keep data private and a particularly threatening piece by Lori Andrews promising sudden cuts in our personal credit lines and troubles obtaining insurance because Facebook is using us.

All three authors make good points, and they are points worth considering for anyone invested in a digital life. But they also brought to mind Reason magazine’s June 2004 cover story – a remarkably poignant preview of the world we now live in. It was also a reminder that a lot of us are okay with the amount of information we choose to share online, and many of us even benefit from giving marketers, friends and co-workers a more complete picture of who we are.

It’s probably unfair to blame social media specifically, but I think it’s safe to say that the 24/7 media barrage of soundbites we face every day could be taking its toll. Twitter users need to make their point in 140 characters or less, USA Today, Fox News and others have shortened stories to be quickly digested and even media outlets like CNN rely on the pretty faces of their news anchors to keep our attention. As a result any substantive conversation lasting over five minutes is met with glazed eyes and shuffling feet. “Didn’t my iPhone just ring?”

I’ll be the first to admit that if we really want the ears, eyes and attention of our audience we need to make sure that our message is relevant (and interesting). This is particularly true in the workplace. How many times have you sat in a meeting where three or four of the people attending open up their laptop, tap away on their iPad or distractedly thumb through emails or text messages on their smart phones? Although the problem may sometimes be the meeting, even in the midst of important discussions, I’ve watched colleagues allow themselves to be distracted by email and other work they perceive is more important—only to find out later that it wasn’t.

Public Funding for Public Elections

Larry Lessig gave a rousing performance for the 100th Seminar About Long-Term Thinking. In a lawyerly fashion he laid out evidence of a new type of corruption that is disrupting the American republic, and he offered a remedy for that corruption. Lessig has a very distinctive visual style of using slides that punctuates, word for word, the clear logic of his argument.

He said the type of corruption rampant in the US Congress is not the old type of bribery, where congressional representatives had safes in their offices to hold the cash they received for voting in certain directions. That is now illegal and eliminated. This new type of corruption is more subtle, indirect and harder to outlaw. Corporations legally donate money to the election campaigns of legislators, who in turn tend to vote in favor of the interests of those corporations. Non-profits like Maplight can graph the evidence that a representative voting in favor of a particular corporate-friendly law will receive 6 or 10 or 13 times the funding than someone who opposes the law. He cited studies that showed the ROI (return on investment) of lobbying to be 1,000%. It was one of the sanest expenses for a corporation. But the distortion is not just one sided.

Hansoo Lee is co-founder and CEO of Magoosh, an online test prep company with products for the SAT, GRE, and GMAT.

The rising cost of higher education has driven student debt to worrisome levels. With the advancements in digital and online education, more and more would-be college students are seeking the inexpensive, individualized alternatives online.

However, the benefits of higher education are still immense. Given the debate around the value of a college degree, it’s important tease out the exact benefits that you’d get out a college experience, especially because many of them impact your digital presence.

1. The Network

Your real life social networks are largely tied to the institutions at which you’ve spent time: high school, college, graduate school, the companies at which you’ve worked, church, sports teams, etc. As you move forward in your career, these networks play a large role in securing jobs. That’s because managers often hire within their extended networks.

One major benefit of college is the ready-made network you will have upon graduation.

Look back at any period of rapid technological progress and you’ll find two groups of individuals: Pioneers tirelessly charting new territory for the benefit of the species and members of the old order standing against the tide to fight back the phantom of their own perceived obsolescence. The debate over the Stop Online Piracy Act boils down to exactly this — a desperate last-ditch effort by the reigning Hollywood and recording industry elite to preserve their crumbling empires, no matter the cost to free speech, innovation and security.

“Infernal Machines”

It’s not the first time this has happened, and it certainly won’t be the last. Jump back a hundred or so years to one example famously cited by copyright law professor Lawrence Lessig, in which American march composer John Philip Sousa speaks out against a machine called the gramophone that played recorded music without the need of live musicians.

“When I was a boy…in front of every house in the summer evenings, you would find young people together singing the songs of the day or old songs,” Sousa said at a Congressional hearing in 1906. “Today you hear these infernal machines going night and day. We will not have a vocal cord left. The vocal cord will be eliminated by a process of evolution, as was the tail of man when he came from the ape.” Ironically, he was rallying against the very recording industry that went on to rally against recordable cassette tapes, and is currently rallying against the internet.

The past year was a tempestuous one in the world of desktop operating systems, it seems fair to say, with big changes occurring in just about all of the major contenders.

Most notably, we saw a raft of mobile-inspired features being brought onto the desktop, sometimes to a chilly reception among users.

If you’re wondering–or perhaps even fearing–what other changes 2012 will bring to your desktop, this may be a good time to take matters into your own hands and choose a system that puts you in control.

The system I’m referring to, of course, is Linux. It’s probably already on your phone. Here are just a few reasons you should give the free operating system a try on your desktop

1. It’s Diverse

Detractors like to refer to Linux’s diversity as a “fragmentation problem,” but in fact it’s one of its greatest strengths. Users have countless Linux distributions to choose from, whether it’s one like Mint or Ubuntu that puts usability at the forefront, or one like Fedora with numerous enterprise-focused features and extra security. There are even flavors focused on specific industries and niches. There’s something for everyone in the world of Linux, and it’s increasingly cross-platform as well.

2. It’s Customizable

Not only can you choose the particular Linux distribution you use, but one of the hallmarks of Linux is that it’s also highly customizable. Don’t like Ubuntu’s new Unity desktop or Mint’s GNOME 3? No problem–there are many others to choose from, and your pick can be easily installed. There’s no vendor lock-in here to dictate how you must use your computer.

3. It’s Open Source

A big part of Linux’s flexibility, of course, derives from the fact that it’s open source software. That means that no other entity controls the code–any developer or user can see and modify the code as they see fit. A world of custom tweaks and apps is before you, in other words.

Note: This text was previously released on the Huffington Post on August 31, 2012. A week before the NFl began their official season.

The NFL prepares for its upcoming season, and during exhibition games on television, as wide receivers go deep for spectacular catches, I cannot help but be reminded of exciting moments from the London Olympic Games, particularly in track & field — when Usain Bolt ran to take three gold medals in the the 100 m, 200 m and 4×100 m relay.

Coincidentally, there has been speculation that Bolt may transition to professional sports such as football in the NFL, although he may prefer soccer. The main reason behind his potential future in either sport is not because he is a good ball handler, in fact, the ball is hardly mentioned. What matters is that Bolt is fast.

Note: This entry was updated on August 19, 2012 with an extra commentary at the end of the main text.

As an educator in higher education and researcher specializing in remix culture and authorship, when I first learned about Zakaria’s admission to plagiarism, I was very disappointed in him, and thought that there was no way around it, that his admission of plagiarizing parts of Jill Lepore‘s work on gun control written for the New Yorker puts into question his intellectual integrity.

I thought that his apology was quick and to the point, but that somehow it was not enough. I thought that it was necessary for Zakaria to come forward and explain in as much detail as possible the reasoning for his behavior. And I thought that I wasn’t alone in hoping for this to happen–that if an actual explanation was delivered, it would all serve the constructive purpose of discussing the seriousness of plagiarism with students while providing a concrete example of a public intellectual who committed such an unacceptable act.

Note: This text appeared previously on Huffington post. Since its original publication on August 8, 2012, NBC decided to at least make available live streaming of the closing ceremonies. Other than this, much of what is observed in the following commentary remains relevant.

Viewers well versed in media expect delivery-on-demand for major events. This has created a peculiar tension when viewing prime-time Olympic coverage consisting of competitions that previously took place throughout the day, but which were not broadcasted live on TV. After the first week of events, it appears that audiences are tuning-in to NBC’s evening broadcast in larger numbers than previous Olympics, and this has become the network’s main justification for holding out on selected events until prime-time.

Social media spoilers are inevitable when the broadcasting network decides to block-out selected events and save them for primetime. This became evident to me as I experienced the Olympics during the first three days.

It began on Friday when I settled to watch the opening ceremony. At this time I briefly considered the fact that the broadcast was not live on the East Coast of the United States, where I live. I also realized that people on the West Coast would see the opening extravaganza three hours after me.

I said to myself that it did not matter because viewing a delayed broadcast of an opening event, sure to be considered historic, would not change my viewing experience. Such a situation is equivalent to one’s willingness to watch a television series knowing that it is a recorded production.

Things were different when I selectively viewed the first events on Saturday live on Bravo, CNBC, MSNBC, and NBC Sports. The multiple broadcasts were also complemented with apps for mobile media, well supported with the nbcolympics.com website.

Throughout the day I checked twitter and Facebook for updates and comments. I soon learned that Michael Phelps took fourth place in the Men’s 400m Individual Medley, while Ryan Lochte took first, winning the gold. However, I was not able to experience the historic moment until primetime on NBC. At this point I was more interested in knowing how it happened, and was no longer invested in the event as I would have, had it been live.

The same thing happened again on Sunday when Lochte and Phelps participated in the men’s 4×100-meter freestyle relay only to come second to France. Again, I learned about this in the late afternoon, but I waited to view it during primetime on NBC.

The decision by NBC to select certain events, from earlier in the day, and broadcast them during primetime began to be discussed as soon as Saturday, and by Sunday, stories were written on different online publications. Entertainment Weekly, in particular, ran two extensive stories. NBC apparently made its decision in order to attain higher ratings during its primetime broadcast. Understandably some people are quite unhappy about NBC’s decision, which is why, as I write this, the hash tag #nbcfail is still going strong with rants.

After viewing the events on Sunday night, however, I don’t think that the problem for NBC is that selected events are shown well after they take place. The problem, in my view, is that NBC appears to be selecting the wrong events for delayed broadcast at night.

To be specific, both on Saturday and Sunday during primetime, NBC went back and forth between gymnastics and swimming. When swimming came on, I could not help but think that I was about to see something which had already taken place. But with gymnastics, I did not mind the delayed broadcast at all. Why, I thought? I came to the conclusion that it has to do with the type of sport.

Swimming is an action sport, which deals with extreme physical performance dependent on time. It is defined by exciting moments such as when your favorite athlete does not even take third place. Add to this the possibility of breaking a world record, and you are sure to have a nail-biting experience as a viewer. Such thrill is unlikely to happen with a delayed broadcast of a major swimming competition such as Lochte’s and Phelps’ once it has been spoiled earlier in the day due to social media and online news sources.

Gymnastics, on the other hand, is a sport about physical strength, precision and gracefulness. Add to this the fact that it depends on points given by judges who, in large part, rely on aesthetics, and we have a dynamic that is closer to viewing a theatrical performance, and not so different from viewing the opening ceremony. Gymnastics is one of my favorite categories in the Olympics, and I don’t think I have ever experienced them live.

NBC’s situation actually makes apparent the fact that major networks need to better understand how to create a worthwhile experience for viewers who are likely to know already much about sporting events that took place early in the day (in this case the Olympics) which they decide to deliver during primetime.

If a network decides to hold out on a sport defined by its physical excitement, such as swimming, then an effort should be made in creating a viewing experience about how and why something happened and not “what will happen.” This approach would then make the juxtaposition of swimming and gymnastics a better fit given their differences as I explained. With this more realistic approach Bob Costas will not have to say “no spoilers” as he introduces the taped segment of Lochte winning gold while Phelps takes none, hoping that the viewers will have a thrilling experience. I did not.

The RE/Mixed Media Festival, now in it’s 3rd year, is an annual celebration of collaborative art-making and creative appropriation. It’s the artists’ contribution to the ongoing conversation about remixing, mashups, copyright law, fair use, and the freedom of artists to access their culture in order to add to and build upon it.

The festival – which this year will take place at the Brooklyn Lyceum – a 3-floor 10,000 sq. ft. venue on the border of the Park Slope and Gowanus neighborhoods of Brooklyn – will feature performances, panel discussions, live musical collaborations, hip-hop, sampling, film & video, DIY, food and drink, DJs, technology, interactive installations, painting, sculpture, software, hacking, and much more!

Note: Previously this entry read “book print.” This was a mistake on my part. It should be “book sprint.”

I recently read the “book print” New Aesthetic, New Anxieties by a group of media researchers, theorists and curators, who got together for three and a half days from June 17–21, 2012, at V2, in Rotterdam, The Netherlands.

The concept of coming together for just a few days to brainstorm a book is certainly something worth considering as an act of creative critical practice. The book from this standpoint functions surprisingly well, especially because its premise is delivered to match the speed of change that its subject (The New Aesthetic) experiences in the daily flow of information throughout the global network. I personally find amazing that a book of this sort can be put together with some cohesion.

Digging through my archives, I found the list of my early updates on Facebook. When I joined Facebook back in 2008, personal updates read “What are you doing?” prompted with “Your Name is … ” I liked the idea behind positioning the Facebook user in a constant state of action. It was like a performance online. Because of this set up, I found myself always thinking of what I was actually doing at the moment that I entered Facebook, and thought of creative ways to approach the apparent triviality of the updates.

We are currently conducting a survey for a Remix Studies book project and we would really appreciate your help. The survey is quick and easy and should take no more than a few minutes of your time. Your assistance will be invaluable in the development of the book, which we hope will be of great use to students, teachers, researchers and practitioners of remix alike.

If possible, we would also be very grateful if you could help us to distribute the survey to anyone within your networks who has an interest in remix.

Kim Jung Il is dead. Sadam and Kadafi have been overthrown and executed. The model of the old-school dictator seems to be dying. Unfortunately, there’s a new dictator in town. Well, not really new, but its presence has never been more prevalent or obvious. This dictator is not just one person or regime. The neo-dictator is comprised of countless organizations, with its power being shifted and redistributed per agenda, so this dictator can’t ever really be killed off. Like any good tyrant, the neo-dictator is motivated by lust for money and power (the quench for which can never be sated). Naturally the neo-dictator’s most powerful tool is the law, laws like SOPA (Stop Online Piracy Act) and PIPA (Protect IP Act), which are designed so content providers and their bed fellows could hold onto their outdated and dying business models. Perhaps it’s just a tactic to slow down technological advancement while they catch up.

Erik Kessels’ installation shows what 24 hours of photos on Flickr looks like in physical form. The installation got me thinking about the exorbitant amount of pictures we take today. I’ve never been a big picture taker, that was until I got a digital camera. I have a little over a hundred physical pictures I’ve collected over my lifetime, but I have thousands in digital form, most of which I accumulated in a span of 3-4 years, starting about 7 years ago. My physical pictures I view once in a while, with a definite level of fondness, sometimes wishing I had taken more pictures. I took those pictures to commemorate specific events: nieces’ birthdays, the first time I went camping with my nieces, my last weekend in San Antonio before I moved back to LA, my college graduation, nieces’ high school graduations, dad’s 60th birthday, the last party I attended in Boston before I moved back to LA, pictures from my cross-country trips, when the family dog was just a puppy, and so on. Most of my digital pictures, however, are rather insignificant.